Gloria Steinem and the roar of the gyno-saur
Well, I had to weigh in on Gloria Steinem’s politics of gynocentrism. Here’s my syndicated column out today. Enjoy!
***
The death cry of Gloria Steinem
Michelle Malkin
Copyright Creators Syndicate 2008
Behold with me the politics of gynocentrism. What a depressing and desiccative sight it is. Just look at Gloria Steinem. From once-ripe feminist icon to idea-barren harridan, she offers nothing to young women but anachronistic man-hate, anti-military bigotry and woe-is-me wallowing.
Hope and change? Try harp and whinge. Some things get better with age. The women’s rights movement isn’t one of them.
In the dark and desperate days of gyno-candidate Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Team Hill dragged Steinem out of the leftist dustbin for a grieve-a-thon in Austin, Texas. The 73-year-old activist sulked about Barack Obama’s ascendancy to The New York Observer, blaming voters who “want redemption for racism” and complaining that not “as many want redemption for the gynocide.”
What does she mean by gynocide? “There are six million female lives lost in the world every year simply because they are female,” Steinem asserted, making a passing reference to pregnant women killed by male partners. Presumably, she’s not including the millions of unborn girls aborted around the world every year because of their gender. (Not exactly the kind of empowerment the fist-raising, bra-burning pro-choicers had in mind.) And nothing in Steinem’s record indicates that she’s thinking of the untold numbers of girls and women murdered for “honor” in the name of Allah by Muslim relatives.
It’s Western men Steinem detests. You know, the ones who watch football, whom the NOW propagandists tried to blame for a mythic rise in domestic violence on Super Bowl Sundays, and the ones who serve in the U.S. armed forces — like that gyno-enemy, John McCain.
As the Observer reported, Steinem launched into a full-scale tirade about McCain’s war heroism — peddling a double standard that simply doesn’t exist:
“Suppose John McCain had been Joan McCain and Joan McCain had got captured, shot down and been a POW for eight (sic) years. [The media would ask], ‘What did you do wrong to get captured? What terrible things did you do while you were there as a captive for eight years?’”
In fact, nasty anonymous fliers in South Carolina did attack McCain’s years in captivity, and liberal websites have spotlighted the grievances, doubts and conspiracy theories of some of McCain’s fellow POWs.
But it’s not just about John McCain. “Steinem’s broader argument was that the media and the political world are too admiring of militarism in all its guises,” the Observer helpfully explained.
“I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn’t been trained to kill anybody. And she probably didn’t even play war games as a kid,” Steinem spewed, later adding that “from George Washington to Jack Kennedy and PT-109 we have behaved as if killing people is a qualification for ruling people.”
From Vietnam to Iraq, self-contradictory feminists have always behaved as if serving in the military was about nothing more than “killing people” — even as they clamored to put women on the front lines in combat roles in the name of gender equality. Leave it to the progressive left to smear their sisters after pushing for decades to integrate them into the “war machine.” They don’t care about the accomplished careers of women in the armed services. They care about haranguing Congress on government funding for their favorite contraceptive pills and abortions, portraying female soldiers as victims, hounding military recruiters, and exploiting accusations of harassment and abuse to undermine military institutions.
American women are the freest, wealthiest, most educated in the world. They are liberated enough to choose someone for president other than a female candidate out of uterus-based loyalty. This should be viewed as progress, not heresy. But the old-guard feminists — the “ruling people” — deeply resent this independence as they cling to what’s left of their power base and their shrinking absolute moral authority card.
Like their increasingly whiny candidate Clinton, Gloria Steinem and the fading gyno-saurs just can’t accept when it’s time to quit.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Jules Crittenden » Stay Ugly
- PAXALLES
- Obama- Whining We Can Believe In « Out West
- Ed Driscoll.com
- BizzyBlog » Couldn’t Help But Notice (030608)
- workplace communication
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Feminist Nonsense, Hillary Clinton
Right Pundits
» Joe Lieberman: Fort Hood Shooter Is ‘Home-Grown Terrorist’Legal Insurrection
» Bruni de la Motte for Health Care CzarRiehl World View
» Obama: No Military Death Shall Go UnexploitedLegal Insurrection
» In The End: No Public Option, No Abortions, No Pelosi, No ReidThe Other McCain
» Paralysis by analysisThe Powers That Be
» Obama: ‘Don’t Jump to Conclusions’ About Ft. Hood; Immediately Jumps to ConclusionsLegal Insurrection
» NY Times Names Names
Terrig:
Congradulations on your good fortune!
Despite what ppl may believe about me just based on my opinions, I am not a bad person.
IVF does involve discarding fertilized eggs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IVF
scroll down to where it says issues. It’s also in the meat I believe.
These discarded eggs COULD become a life if implanted.
IIRC the Catholic church calls IVF a sin and encourages devout couples to seek other means of having a child, perhaps adoption.
Despite some ppl thinking that I am trying to advance some agenda or that I am a mad scientist, I am truly just a person trying to be informed as much as possible about the issues.
I cannot be intellectually honest with myself and at the same time support IVF BUT say abortion is murder.
There it is! Thank you emjem24 for a stimulating discussion.
Zero:
Your time in Iraq should have made you appreciate life more? I’m not seeing it. Since my husband is still serving in the military and we’ve lost friends in both Iraq and Afghanistan, I want to live life to the fullest even more.
I don’t agree about IVF. If a couple discards their fertilized eggs perhaps there was a medical reason. I wasn’t there. I don’t know.
How have I misrepresented your position? For someone who has a new respect for human life after serving in Iraq, I’m seeing quite the opposite. You’ve turned your back on it. Your story isn’t adding up but then most troll stories never do.
Yes, it’s okay to support “strangers” right to choose but not your wife. That must have been a conversation. What if she says, “honey, I’ve been doing some thinking and I really don’t want your kid.” What will you say then? Can’t wait to be a bug in your house.
Believe me the sarcasm was intentional. Ask Rusty… you like him so much. As to the “childish taunts” aspect, I’m not taunting you. You’ll know it when you see it. You think that’s taunting you have no clue.
As to inserting emotion… oops, it’s an emotional issue. Then again, you’re a man who will never feel a living thing growing inside so you will never feel that emotional bond. The more you reveal your lack of insight regarding both women and pregnancy is the more I turn away from your “values.”
There’s no honesty in your debate. There’s more a lack of clarity and a bit of hypocrisy. Your take is that abortion isn’t your problem so why should I be concerned since it’s not “hurting” anyone. It’s just cells, it’s just sex, it’s nothing. Good for you. You are removed from the situation unless you’ve personally experienced it. Some men equally feel emotional as me at being cheated out of knowing their kid after finding out it had been aborted. What do you tell them?
emjem, I ask this question in all sincerity and good faith: Is it possible for another poster to disagree with your position on any issue in a rational and civil manner without you heading off on some sort of hysterical and emotional rant? You come off pretty unhinged at times.
Good posts zeroangel.
emjem24:
My conversation with you has run its course but I DO want to make one point clear for the benefit of the group. That said:
ALCON:
If my wife’s and my b/c failed I would not want her to get an abortion because I would be concerned about her health and whether or not we would have a chance to conceive in the future (we aren’t getting any younger).
I would support her right to choose and I would ultimately defer the decision to her after making my case.
I’m sure I could relate being as how that happened to me in the past. In a way, I am glad. I likely would not be married to the person I am today if things went another way.
dakine: Thank you.
Actually it was quite underwhelming. I really don’t associate with cold fish. I’m sorry I inconvenienced your little world with feminine emotions. How messy of me. I kinda got that way when comforting my sister-in-law who miscarried her 2nd trimester baby…oops I’m sorry your terminology would be “fetus.”
Say hi to the Troll Liberation Front members for me. I’m sure they’ll welcome yet another cold, self-serving individual into their ranks.
#97 On March 5th, 2008 at 4:02 pm, zeroangel said:
“If a fertilized egg is a life, then discarding those during IVF IS murder.”
You said it; I didn’t.
A fertilized egg has the full human genetic DNA complement: 46 (23 pairs of) chromosomes.
Therefore, it is an individual; individual meaning that it cannot be further divided and remain what it is – in this sense, it cannot be divided and maintain 46 chromosomes.
Individual simply means “un-cuttable”.
Individual = in (opposite) + divide (cut)
The Latin individual means the same as the Greek atom:
atom = a (opposite) = tom (cut)
In modern Greek, “atom” is in fact the noun for an “individual”.
A rather lengthy way of explaining why I (and my wife) feel that the fertilized egg, the zygote, is an individual; and, indeed, a life.
And, that the discarding of unused fertilized eggs in the course of IVF, or the deliberate “culling” from the uterine lining of, say, 5 of 6 implanted fertilized eggs, is, sad to say, the killing of (an) individual(s).
Which, many folks, my wife and I included, believe in many (?most??all?) instances might easily be classified as murder.
If one zygote is produced through IVF, and implanted, and then does not “take”, i.e., it aborts spontaneously; well, that’s sad, and it’s time to try again, as couples do with the old-fashioned method.
But, my wife and I have big problems with implanting multiple zygotes, and then after a period of time, winnowing down the number of implanted, growing embryos (not sure what the jargon is for that procedure); and also we have big problems with fertilizing multiple eggs, and then discarding, or experiemnting on, the extras.
The zygote is an individual.
That fact may be inconvenient for many people;
but, it is a fact, and the zygote remains an individual, nonetheless.
In the course of IVF, and the production of a successful pregnancy, a couple has been made happy with a newborn baby…but, if extra zygotes were discarded or experimented upon, or if extra implanted fertilized eggs have been “culled”, then individuals have been killed.
Yes, the couple has been made happy, and a healthy baby was delivered to them…but, individuals, as extra fertilized eggs, or as extra implanted fertilized eggs, have been killed.
And that should never, ever be forgotten.
Never.
Life can sometimes be inconvenient.
Trying to have an understanding of right and wrong, and to consistently, honestly follow that understanding, can sometimes be very inconvenient.
But, when it comes to creating life – to repeat, to creating life – try we should.
Dakine:
Since you and I don’t talk much and since a lot of your posts are tinged with trollish remarks… it doesn’t matter what you think. What a shocker you identify with Zero. I’m sorry that cold fish like you and Zero can’t see the emotional side of an issue or are troubled by it.
You think I’m hysterical? Ever lost a baby to miscarriage of have a relative or close friend miscarry? Zero approached this topic in a disrespectful manner as you are doing.
Is it possible that you come off sounding hypocritical when criticizing what was a transparent, heart-felt post? Is it possible that giving a detailed argument responding to what was obviously a disrespectful and disengenuous remark on Zero’s part makes me passionate about a subject?
Let’s talk issues and not semantics, Dakine… or better yet, don’t bother. It would rather be pointless on my part given your track record.
Zero:
Giving perspective also helps fellow human beings to understand each other. Given that you didn’t do this, exactly how honest were you in this discussion? No wonder you think embryos aren’t living entities. If you or your wife do not want children, why don’t you just get a vasectomy? Then there will be no “birth control failures.”
Your situation also happened to my husband a long time before we met each other. His ex-girlfriend aborted his baby and he had to learn after the fact. Yes, if they had stayed together, he and I wouldn’t be married. Yet, he genuinely felt wronged but moved on. He took it hard and it has taken him time to want to even have children after that experience.
Some couples just don’t have children. My sister-in-law and her husband chose not to have children because they couldn’t envision children in their lives. Given your experience, perhaps this is the case with you as well.
I am 32 and want to have children. I’ve comforted a cherished sister-in-law after she lost her baby and a mother still grieving for the 3 she lost. There will always be “emotion” attached to this issue.
Granite:
Thank you.
#106 emjem24:
Way back, some very good, close friends of ours experienced a miscarriage.
Then, about a year later, my wife miscarried.
And it affected her; she was quite sad for a bit.
(Fortunately, even though I was a 25-year-old dolt, I somehow understood.)
Next time, #1 was born.
But after that, another miscarriage.
Then, blessedly, #2 and #3 came along OK.
We had known for a while that my in-laws had had a miscarriage before my wife was born.
But what surprised us was learning how very common miscarriages are.
This doctor, this nurse telling us, at the time of the first miscarriage, “We had a miscarriage between each of our five kids”, or “We had four miscarriages in a row, then had five kids in a row.”
To boot, that’s when I learned for the first time that my parents had had two miscarriages between me and my brother!
Stick to your guns, emjem24; it’s so much more than a “clump of cells”.
Another example of, if you have to explain it to someone, they’ll never understand. (And those someones just hate it when I say that!)
#108 On March 5th, 2008 at 5:17 pm, emjem24 said:
“Granite:
Thank you.”
Don’t mention it!
Back to the subject of Steinem and old-guard feminism, someone told me (sorry about the hearsay) that two young womenfriends of him went to a NOW meeting for the first time and walked out in disgust. “We thought this was supposed to be about feminism, not lesbianism,” they told him. Do you suppose this holds a critical key to the thinking of the feminist establishment?
Does she hate JFK because he married a beautiful woman instead of a hag like her and her followers? Also, I love the term “gyno-saur”, too! LOL
granite:
Good post and intellectually honest, obviously you and I disagree on the pivotal question: “when does life begin?” but that’s why this is such a tough one.
ALCON:
To clarify my personal situation for the benefit of all and to ensure that emjem24’s assumptions aren’t taken as fact:
1) The girl that aborted my child in the past was a G/F and not my wife. I was annoyed she didn’t feel the need to consult me but, as I said, I am glad in retrospect that it happened.
2) My wife and I CURRENTLY are not trying to have a child, but the option is still open for the future.
3) I am totally open to having an honest discussion with anyone on any topic. But please don’t expect me to spill out my heart on personal matters if you decide to try and belittle me.
Thats why 30 pieces and I did not pursue the “atheist” Vs agnostic discussion on the other thread.
ref above: child was meant to have quotes around it. Pls don’t take this as me concedeing a point. I use ‘my “child”‘ because its easier then writing “the fetus that shares my DNA with hers.” That and it just seems to be the convention in language.
Azygos:
Another exmaple of bigotry. I suppose I could say something like, “You ppl are illogical and foolish for believing in the Sky Fairy! You simply don’t UNDERSTAND!” But I don’t, and I dislike atheists that behave that way. It is every bit as bigoted.
#114 Azygos:
I hear ya!
ZERO,
That was not meant to insult you, I apologize if it did. Perhaps we could discuss something less controversial, like evolution
Azygos:
Hahah. Yah, sorry, I think you are right. I am passionate about my beliefs and I guess I do get rather zealous.
This thread has already grown very long. Perhaps I should make a point to not come back until tommorrow. I have a feeling a won’t be able to resist the temptation *smile*.
Zero,
I know that the Catholic church called it a sin. Funny thing in 1981 when the first test tube baby was born, I was a senior in high school-I went to Catholic school for 12 years. Anyway, we were in “Faith” class and this topic came up and I got into a very loud shouting match with Sister Sara regarding this issue. I told her that none of us know our futures and if that was the only way I could have a child someday I wasn’t going to turn it down because the church said no. The whole class got involved on my side. I had no intention of telling them where my child came from if we had been successful at IVF. I don’t know that most priests though really feel that way today as many are open minded on this but not abortion of course.
I do know that often times IVF involves discarded eggs. I am not comfortable with that, it’s very disconcerting. We knew we’d never be able to do that so we had made the decision from the get go to use all the eggs even if we wound up with 7 kids, which I would not have minded either. It was a very painful time in our lives but we are very blessed with our little kids (I say this as they are downstairs making a mess!)
Great column Michelle.
And the phrase “gyno-saur”, nice touch!
And how many females have been lost to abortion since the Supreme Court “found” the right to choose in the Constitution in 1973, Gloria? This is the kind of gyno-cide you promote.
Gyno-saur – now that’s funny, I dont care who you are. Git’er DONE!
Terrig:
I’m very sorry for your IVF experiences. I know a few married couples in the military that are having trouble conceiving and have tried IVF. It didn’t take for them either. I hope I never have to go down the IVF road that so many brave men and women have tried.
On a side note: I did not intend to hijack this topic with my argument with Zero. As both a teacher, conservative feminist, and a woman who would like to have children some day, I’m seeing the blatant disregard for the unborn and the living (especially children) both in America and the world. It’s an alarming trend that should fill one with dread. Too bad there will be those who don’t want to be troubled with the “inconvenience” of a pregnancy or self-examination of what that “bundle of cells” really means.
As to Zero’s assertion that he’s been “belittled” on this forum, please try again. You’ve been challenged in your views. One other thing, Terrig, I, and others regularly pour our hearts out only to be derided by those who don’t want “honest” conversations. Sharing one’s life experiences creates an open channel of communication between human beings. If you do not want to partake of that and say controversial things that will encourage chastisement, perhaps you should reexamine what and why you’re posting in the first place.
emjem:
Let’s see, you’ve used straw-man arguments and appeals to emotion to imply I think a fetus is “cancer.”
You’ve said my opinions are a “slap in the face” to women (it’s also clear you are ignorant of what happens during IVF.)
You’ve called me a troll and said that I am “inhuman.”
You’ve made assumptions about me and implied that I feel the way I do because I am detached and never experienced the topic.
Then, when you discovered that is wrong, you suggested that I feel the way I do BECAUSE of my experiences and suggested perhaps my wife and I don’t want kids. (huh?)
You’ve called me loathsome.
You’ve implied that life and creation are not important to me.
You’ve called me “positively creepy.”
You just about called me Hitler.
When I finally tried to offer a “branch of peace” by saying thank you for the conversation, you flat out rejected said branch and called me a “cold fish.”
…and so on.
On the flip side, the worst thing I said to you is perhaps called you ignorant of IVF (in this post, but you admit it anyways).
That about sums it up zeroangel.
Zero:
Let’s consider the following:
I’m characterizing your positions not your character. I’m also speaking to the pro-choice movement in general. Their/your positions are just as inconsistent as you assert mine are. Where’s the beef?
You like to press that hot button. You like to stir it up. Am I wrong?
I called you a troll because you exhibit the behaviors of several that inhabit this blog. I feel that anyone who finds abortion acceptable (for whatever the reason) has in some ways lost touch with what gave us life in the first place. When you accept an inhumane practice I guess perhaps, that makes you inhuman? You have also stated that you were glad that your ex-girlfriend had her abortion but support your wife having one if you/she experiences a “birth control failure.” How is any of this life-affirming to you?
You mean this “peace branch?”
I never called you Hitler… you sound like him so please remove that from your argument. You never addressed a lot of people’s questions about your views so how was it stimulating? Stimulating like “peace branches” only mean something if they’re intended in a serious manner. Next…
Since I’m not ignorant of the IVF procedure and its repercussions aren’t you making assumptions as to my knowledge or lack thereof? I’ve had friends go through the procedure. I’ve even admited to being discomfited by the wasteful nature of discarding fertilized eggs. What point are you making? Assumptions abound on both sides of any discussion.
How does this invole you? If you have a problem with me, Dakine, please take it up with me, and stop hiding behind another poster. Okay?
self-edit: invole= involve Dang those invisible v’s!
emjem24:
You can have the last word, that is fine with me.
As for this:
If I missed anyone’s questions or didn’t address anything pls let me know now.
Ahhh looking back. I guess I didn’t point out that granite was using equivocation to make his point (individual).
In any case though, however he comes to his conclusions, it is clear that he believes life begins at conception. His stance on IVF is logically consistent with it. So, to me, he is being intellectually honest about IVF & abortion and we can agree to disagree, hence I left it alone.
Zero:
You’re “addressed” questions but you either redirect, deflect, or don’t answer. Things you don’t fully answer are:
1. Why is a baby just a “bundle of cells?” Is a baby just a non-person or a thing?
2. How does the pill/using a condom = abortion?
3. How is it you support abortion but don’t support late-term abortion? Aren’t they the same thing?
self-edit: you’re = you’ve
1. Perhaps I didn’t spell it outright, but I would think it’s obvious, as an atheist, I do not believe in the idea of a “soul.” To me, there is nothing special about the point at which a sperm and egg join. I do not believe human “life” starts until some point where the fetus has some level of “sentience.” In any case, how are you defining “non-person” or “thing?” They are awfully vague and I could answer you: both.
2. If you take my premise that a fertilized egg is not a life, then I could argue that said egg is no more “alive” or has any more “potential” than a sperm or an egg that are separate. Thus, abortion / and birth control are on the same moral plane IN THAT SENSE ONLY. As I stated before, I am aware of, and wary of, potential complications from abortions.
3. No. Refer to #1 and my concern about where “sentience” and “life begins.
Then again, maybe it is not obvious. I suppose there are some form of naturalists that call themselves atheists. I wouldn’t really say that is atheism however since atheism generally eschews the supernatural. Were you supposing that I was naturalist that believes in the idea of a “soul”?
Zero:
1. There would be some atheists who would disagree with you. You don’t have to have a “soul” per se to be alive or you would be discounting a lot of folks. I disagree with your “sentience” argument because then you really are putting human (higher order mammals) on the same plane as other species. Once the egg implants itself into the uterus it’s already developing the precursors to the the nervous system and the brain. I would say that qualifies as “sentience.”
2. Look, I’m sorry but birth control and abortion aren’t on the same moral plane. Many women take birth control besides not to get pregnant. You’re basing this on the premise that you’re eliminating an egg’s potential, be it fertilized or unfertilized. As a man, I really don’t think you understand the many reasons why women take birth control.
3.Again, your “sentience” argument doesn’t account for things like miscarriages, especially in the 2nd trimester. You do not account for things like human perception of pregnancy and the comfortable platitudes that people use like the “non-person” argument to make themselves feel better about abortion.
Again, once that fertilized egg becomes an embryo it’s alive… meaning developing limbs, brain, tisssue, the works. Sentience does not account for how the mother’s body protects, nourishes, and aids the baby’s gestation. If you’re soley using sentience in your argument, then how do you account for conditions like hydrocephalus or brain malformations? Is the baby “sentient?” Does your argument still apply here? Is a human being (even an adult) who can’t interact with its environment because of disease sentient?
We will not agree. I’m not particularly religious and there have been things (like 9/11) that have made me question a higher power but to say that the joining of a man and women creates a “bundle of cells” that you do not consider to be a living human being is pushing the boundaries of both the definitions of “life” and its meaning. Your view seems hopeless and merciless. The creation of life is meaningful… it’s too bad that your life experience and belief systems suggest to you otherwise.
Yes there are atheists who disagree with me, and I believe their argument is similar to yours concerning other species.
equivocation again.
No, I’m putting human fetuses on that plane. Not developed humans or fetuses in later stages. I’ll admit though, I am not sure I think its OK to hunt chimpanzees for sport (for instance), I am still exploring that idea though. Deer and such are OK, IMHO.
No, as I said I’m basing it on the premise that a fetus is not “alive.” In any case, I think you at least understand that we are working with different premises and you realize we won’t agree.
Not sure which one this is, but sounds like “appeal to authority.” Either way, another fallacy.
Most of the rest of that and the next paragraph is argumentum ad populum and “appeals to emotion.” Which I don’t know why you keep doing because likely you, I, and maybe Danke are the only ones still reading.
From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocephalus
So, I don’t see how this is relevant. If you are talking about a brain malformation that renders a person a “vegetable” or “brain dead” then I would say no matter if they are a fetus, baby, or fully grown, they are “dead.” I would defer the decision to “pull the plug” to the family however.
..do not consider a human being until LATER ON in the pregnancy. Our disagreement is only in a matter of weeks – months.
It’s amazing, it’s overwhelming, and it’s remarkable, it is meaningful, why do you think I believe otherwise because of a matter of weeks?
If you are truly interested in my point of view I would recommend Richard Dawkins as he is far more eloquent than I. Be warned though, you won’t like his ideas about foreign policy and neither do I. In all fairness though, I understand he is coming around and accepting ideas closer to Christopher Hitchens in that regard.
Emjen:
This is geting old so let me just make your arguement for you:
Premise 1: Human life is precious.
Premise 2: We cannot reliably say at which point human life begins.
Inference: We cannot reliably say at which point a fetus becomes precious.
Conclusion: We should not kill any fetus to avoid the risk of killing a human.
Anyways, I might have screwed up the steps but thats basically the gist.
Natuarlly, I disagree with premise 2. Can we move on now?
Zero:
Premise 2 and its inference are factually incorrect. I did not state these things. This is your worldview… let my words speak. If you cannot do that then end the discussion.
Factually incorrect. I did not say this. If this were true then there would never be miscarriages, at-risk pregnancies, and ectopic pregnancies.
When you’re basically making an argument for another person who never said most of what you posted, I would say that’s an error in judgement on your part.
Nothing is keeping you in this forum… only your natural impulse to make your argument more acceptable to the rest of us (or just me) who disagree with you.
If you genuinely offered me a “peace branch” then why make this post? Why be so disrespectful about my point of view, or even “pretend” to take this discussion seriously if you take this road? Argue your own points. Your words in my context doesn’t make them my words. They are just words that suit your argument better.
You are not an authority on this topic anymore than I am. You do not speak for women, as I am sure you know that. I do not appeal to emotion… this subject is inherently emotional… not for you. I find it rather condescending and patronizing that you feel you can speak for me or for other women or for that matter tell us how we should feel.
I do not understand you nor do I want to. For someone who’s “leaving the door open for children,” I find your worldview ironic even incompatible. I’m also not interested in your reading list… you will not change my mind and I will not change yours.
Are we done now?